What's the point of decks that just can't be beaten, being completely invincible other than against Fur Hire? It's mindless and stupid, and not fun at all to win 99,999999% of the time.
I never knew that someone who builds a deck to lose in PVP existed.
(Exception: the Espa roba carnival event)
Pretty sure that people strive towards building a deck that's possibly never losses. But of course the game master (Konami) will implement some action (ban list) if such deck ever existed.
Rofl even with my GBs I managed a few wins against Amazoness.
Or you can use Geargia(nearly 100% win when just the right cards) or SSA to stomp Amazoness.
Or you tech in 2+ backrow removal/blocker and you will have an easier time against Amazoness.
It was just too hard to make it lose before the nerfs. It's degenerate when you use a deck with a chance of winning that's too close to 99%. I used to deal with Onslaught through destroying it, but it was so hard to win because there was a second and a third and also a second and a third searcher for it.
"I never knew that someone who builds a deck to lose in PVP existed. " still doesnt mean that some idio ts should make a deck almost invincible and broken and unfair.the problem is they cant lose.dont tell stupitidy at least
"What's the point of decks that just can't be beaten, being completely invincible other than against Fur Hire?" referring to bad deck.amazoness is not a cant be beaten deck
"it, but it was so hard to win because there was a second and a third and also a second and a third searcher for it." so even if thats the case instead of balancing just ruin it.nice job komoney.
Anonymous
Xenon
